Planned city Stalinstadt: a manifesto of the early German Democratic Republic
计划城市斯大林达特：德意志民主共和国早期的宣言
The debate on formalism and heritage
形式主义与遗产之争
After World War II ‘national heritage’ was of great political importance in the Sovietoccupied zone/GDR. Already, by the 1920s, the Soviet Union itself was forced to proclaim ‘socialism in one country’ after the ‘world revolution’ had run out of steam, and to pursue a policy to pacify the multinational state. Stalin’s motto to ‘build up socialism in one country’ was applied to Soviet cultural policies in the early 1930s [28]. The internationalism of the socialist project was thus transformed into national colours. The national particularities within the Soviet Union were to find cultural–folkloristic expression, while at the same time recognizing the supremacy of the centre. An internationalism of a proletariat beyond nations was no longer given any realistic chance of attainment in the foreseeable future. A universal aesthetic language was, accordingly, also rejected as cosmopolitan. What was henceforth required had to be ‘socialist in content – national in form’.
二战后，“国家遗产”在苏联占领区/民主德国具有重大政治意义。到了20世纪20年代，苏联本身已经被迫在“世界革命”失去动力后宣布“一国社会主义”，并推行一项安抚多民族国家的政策。20世纪30年代初，斯大林的座右铭“在一个国家建设社会主义”被用于苏联的文化政策[28]。社会主义工程的国际主义因此变成了民族色彩。苏联内部的民族特性是寻找文化民俗表达，同时承认中心的至高无上地位。在可预见的未来，无产阶级超越国家的国际主义不再有任何实现的现实机会。因此，一种普遍的审美语言也被视为世界主义语言而遭到拒绝。从那时起，所要求的必须是“内容上的社会主义——形式上的国家”。
With the beginning of the Cold War, the debate on modern art started anew within the Soviet Union’s sphere of control and, therefore, within the Soviet-occupied zone/GDR. In fact, the reference to ‘heritage’, involving reference to Schiller and Lessing, had been part of the traditions of both the German communist and social-democratic cultural policies of the working class movement since the times of Franz Mehring and Rosa Luxemburg. Iconoclasm was accordingly regarded as sectarian. Instead, the workers were to be introduced to (high) cultural traditions and the arts [29]. The GDR, which at this time (and up to 1952) had not declared itself a socialist state, also pursued ambitions of an alliance with this approach to cultural policy. The change affected the entire range of cultural policy and was propagated in a public controversy. Within the debate on ‘formalism and heritage’, the cultural–political positions of the GDR were defined and binding rules were established. It was thus not the debate about a socialist project, but the reference to national heritage that dominated the reconstruction rhetoric in the early GDR [30].
随着冷战的开始，关于现代艺术的辩论在苏联的控制范围内，因此在苏联占领区/民主德国内重新开始。事实上，自弗兰兹·梅林（Franz Mehring）和罗莎·卢森堡（Rosa Luxemburg）时代以来，对“遗产”的提及，包括对席勒（Schiller）和莱辛（Lessing）的提及，一直是德国工人阶级运动的共产主义和社会民主文化政策传统的一部分。因此，反偶像主义被视为宗派主义。取而代之的是，向工人们介绍（高级）文化传统和艺术[29]。当时（直到1952年）还没有宣布自己为社会主义国家的民主德国，也追求与这种文化政策方针结盟的野心。这一变化影响了整个文化政策，并在一场公开辩论中传播。在关于“形式主义和遗产”的辩论中，民主德国的文化政治立场得到了界定，并制定了具有约束力的规则。因此，在民主德国早期，主导重建论调的不是关于社会主义项目的辩论，而是对国家遗产的提及[30]。
Socialist/communist architects, who followed Neues Bauen and the Bauhaus philosophy lost all their influence in this period, whereas architects who, out of conviction or opportunism, were somehow able to employ the bourgeois heritage, gained in influence. Reclaiming ‘national heritage’, however, did not at all solve the question of form in urban design. The results show an eclecticism which covers a range between classical citations and the traditional Heimatstil.
在这一时期，追随Neues-Bauen和包豪斯哲学的社会主义/共产主义建筑师失去了所有影响力，而出于信念或机会主义，能够以某种方式利用资产阶级遗产的建筑师则获得了影响力。然而，回收“国家遗产”并没有解决城市设计中的形式问题。结果表明，折衷主义涵盖了经典引文和传统的Heimattil之间的范围。
Of course this orientation had a past history. It existed in the Soviet Union in the 1930s, where, after functional planning concepts such as Nikolai A. Miliutin’s linear town Sozgorod [31], a change was ushered in with the General Plan for Moscow. This important change reflected several developments. These included the dismissal of imminent ‘world revolution’ in favour of national consolidation; the orientation towards extension planning for the towns, especially for Moscow, rather than founding new industrial towns in the country; and the cultural formation within the circle of different nationalities in the Soviet Union at the expense of a cosmopolitan avant-garde. The German communists in their Moscow exile followed these turns, though not without their own sacrifices. Back in Germany, in power and dependent on the Soviet occupation army, they were willing to execute the new thinking. They were not willing to take into account those communist comrades who had survived the Nazi period in Western exile and who were now considered by the Muscovites as ‘still stuck in the debates of the 20s and 30s’.
当然，这个方向有过去的历史。它存在于20世纪30年代的苏联，在尼古拉·A·米利乌廷（Nikolai A.Miliutin）的线性城镇索兹戈罗德（Sozgorod）[31]等功能性规划概念之后，莫斯科的总体规划发生了变化。这一重要变化反映了几项发展。其中包括摒弃即将到来的“世界革命”，支持国家统一；城镇扩建规划的方向，尤其是莫斯科，而不是在该国建立新的工业城镇；以及苏联不同民族圈内的文化形成，以牺牲一个世界性的前卫者为代价。然而，这些德国流亡者并没有放弃他们自己的牺牲。回到德国，掌权并依赖苏联占领军，他们愿意执行新的思维。他们不愿考虑那些在西方流亡的纳粹时期幸存下来的共产主义同志，他们现在被莫斯科人视为“仍陷于20年代和30年代的辩论”。
The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development
The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development plead for a compact town to be built densely and in multistoreyed form, with high-rise buildings in the centre (of big cities). Economic、 aspects are emphasized and land prices transformed into political regulations. The centre is redefined: rather than trade, which has been an essential ‘town constituting factor’ in history, administration and culture now become significant. The recognizable signature of the historic city – or its image – is set against the anonymity and interchangeability of the functionalist town. The town centre is accentuated and the town held together as a compact structure, organized by a system of public spaces and hierarchies of use. Traffic is to be subordinated to the demands of public life. Cityscapes are to be given an individual face, characterized by squares, main streets and the dominant buildings in the town centre. Squares are defined as the structural basis of urban design. The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development are opposed to a dispersed city: ‘It is impossible to transform a town into a garden’. Elements of landscape, such as rivers, are part of the ‘individual face’ of a town; the riverbanks are emphasized as ‘main arteries’ and architectural axes.
城市发展的16项原则要求一个紧凑的城镇以密集和多层的形式建设，在（大城市的）中心有高层建筑。强调经济方面，并将土地价格转变为政治法规。该中心被重新定义：而不是贸易，贸易在历史上一直是一个重要的“城镇构成因素”，行政和文化现在变得重要。这座历史名城的可识别标志——或其形象——与这座功能主义城镇的匿名性和互换性形成了鲜明对比。城镇中心被强调，城镇作为一个紧凑的结构，由公共空间系统和使用等级制度组织在一起。交通要服从公共生活的需要。城市景观将被赋予独立的面貌，以广场、主要街道和市中心的主要建筑为特征。广场被定义为城市设计的结构基础。城市发展的十六项原则反对分散的城市：“不可能把一个城镇变成一个花园”。景观元素，如河流，是一个城镇“个人面貌”的一部分；河岸被强调为“主干道”和建筑轴线。
The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development thus declare an emphasis on urbanity. They oppose functionalist town Utopias as well as those contemporary Western planning philosophies which favoured the ideal of a city-landscape. Instead of a decentralized, green town organized according to functional criteria and more orientated toward landscape than historical structures, the Principles emphasized the economic effectiveness and cultural quality of urban life and referred more to the historically developed urban structures.
因此，城市发展的十六项原则宣告了对城市性的重视。他们反对功能主义的城市乌托邦，也反对当代西方的规划哲学，后者支持城市景观的理想。《原则》强调了城市生活的经济效益和文化质量，并更多地提到了历史上发展起来的城市结构，而不是根据功能标准组织的分散式绿色城镇，更倾向于景观而非历史结构。
For Bruno Flierl, the only critic of architecture the GDR allowed itself, the main difference to the Athens Charter is that The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development did not arise from a discussion among architects as an appeal to the governments. Rather it was the government which decreed a programme of urban development, calling on architects at last to build in a reasonable way. It was a counter-model in so far as the Principles reckoned on a different society [32]. ‘The aim of urban development is the harmonic satisfaction of the human demand for work, dwelling, culture, and recreation’ [33] – the demand to satisfy the vital needs of all has the (unspoken) socialist programme in mind.
布鲁诺·弗利尔（Bruno Flierl）是德意志民主共和国唯一一位对建筑持批评态度的人，他认为《雅典宪章》的主要区别在于，城市发展的十六项原则并不是由建筑师之间的讨论产生的，并不是为了向政府发出呼吁。相反，是政府颁布了一项城市发展计划，呼吁建筑师最终以合理的方式进行建设。这是一种反模式，因为原则适用于不同的社会城市发展的目标是和谐地满足人类对工作、居住、文化和娱乐的需求[33]——满足所有人的切身需求的需求考虑到了（不成文的）社会主义计划。
The big silence of The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development is in relation to urban society as a political and public sphere. The city is seen as the ultimate kind of social living but is not given its own municipal scope of action. The town is defined by the political centre; the only actor referred to is the national government. The cities are to look different, reflecting their respective local traditions, which play a role as variations of urban design. But in the end their centres always represent a fortunate action of the political centre – in the same way as political demonstrations in the town centre are assumed as part of the supralocal (national) politics or representation.
《城市发展十六项原则》中的巨大沉默与作为政治和公共领域的城市社会有关。城市被视为社会生活的终极形式，但却没有赋予其自身的市政行动范围。该镇由政治中心界定；提到的唯一行动者是国家政府。这些城市将看起来不同，反映出各自的地方传统，这些传统在城市设计中扮演着不同的角色。但归根结底，他们的中心总是代表着政治中心的幸运行动——就像市中心的政治示威被认为是超地方（国家）政治或代表的一部分一样。
The authors of the Principles imagine the cities as free of conflict. To the same extent that society-wide planning becomes possible, they propose that the individual and society enter into harmonic co-existence. Astonishingly, the Principles’ attitude towards axes, monumentalism and masses ignores the fact that Nazi town planning looked similar in this respect. The authors clearly felt confident enough not to talk about fascism. They had another original to which they referred: Moscow.
《原则》的作者认为这些城市没有冲突。在全社会规划成为可能的程度上，他们提出个人和社会和谐共存。令人惊讶的是，《原则》对轴线、纪念碑和群众的态度忽视了一个事实，即纳粹的城市规划在这方面看起来很相似。作者显然有足够的信心不谈论法西斯主义。他们提到了另一个原创作品：莫斯科。
The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development caused a break in the planning of Berlin, where Hans Scharoun and a planning group had, since 1946, been developing an extensive new planning following the tenets of the Athens Charter. In 1949 the plan (called the General Plan) was presented in the eastern sector of Berlin and was made the subject of a public debate [34]. By implementing the Principles the government of the GDR initiated a change in urban development policy shortly after the foundation of the state. With this act it repeated the change in Soviet urban development policy in the 1930s [35]. The cancellation of the 1933 Congr`es International d’Architecture Moderne (CIAM) about the ‘functional town’, which had initially been set to take place in Moscow and subsequently resulted in the Athens Charter [36], was symptomatic of that change. Soviet planning moved instead in a different direction and the General Plan of Moscow (1935) formed the planning model that remained binding until 1954. The essential characteristics are the ideal of a compact town, an easy-toread and representative townscape with emphasis on the city centre, a graded system of centres and the reference to the city as a place of progress.
《城市发展十六项原则》打破了柏林的规划，自1946年以来，汉斯·沙隆和一个规划小组一直在按照《雅典宪章》的原则制定一项广泛的新规划。1949年，该计划（称为总计划）在柏林东区提出，并成为一场公开辩论的主题[34]。通过实施这些原则，德意志民主共和国政府在建国后不久就开始改变城市发展政策。这一法案重复了20世纪30年代苏联城市发展政策的变化[35]。1933年，国际城市宪章（CIAM）被取消。苏联的规划则朝着另一个方向发展，莫斯科总计划（1935年）形成了直到1954年仍具有约束力的规划模式。其基本特征是紧凑型城镇的理想，一个易于阅读的、具有代表性的城镇景观，强调城市中心，一个中心分级系统，并将城市作为一个进步的地方。
Stalinstadt in the GDR is the only German city that was actually founded on this model; but parallel examples of new town planning exist in other countries of the Eastern Bloc, such as Nowa Huta in Poland or Dimitrovgrad in Bulgaria. The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development were taken from the General Plan for Moscow [37]. Besides the decreed introduction of these Principles [38], it is remarkable that a planning model which had its origin in quite different conditions was plainly taken over [39]. It was also from Soviet planning experiences that the concept of the residential complex was derived and incorporated into The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development. Fig. 4 shows typical patterns of residential complexes as they were planned and built in numerous Soviet cities during the 1930s, 1940s and early 1950s [40]. As can be seen, they show a clear resemblance to those of Stalinstadt.
德意志民主共和国的斯大林达特是唯一一座真正建立在这种模式基础上的德国城市；但东部地区的其他国家也有类似的新城规划实例，比如波兰的诺瓦胡塔或保加利亚的迪米特罗夫格勒。城市发展的16项原则取自莫斯科总体规划[37]。除了这些原则的颁布引入[38]，一个起源于完全不同条件的规划模式显然被取代[39]，这一点值得注意。住宅综合体的概念也是从苏联的规划经验中衍生出来的，并被纳入了城市发展的十六项原则中。图4显示了20世纪30年代、40年代和50年代初在许多苏联城市规划和建造的住宅综合体的典型模式[40]。可以看出，它们与斯大林达特的作品有着明显的相似之处。
Stalinstadt
On 14 November 1950 – only a few months after construction of the plant began – the location of the new town was determined [41]. Following a concept-search phase, a draft by Kurt W. Leucht became the basis of all other planning in 1951. The plans for the new plant and the new town were developed in central bureaux assigned to the relevant ministries. As well as giving a description of the town concept and its implementation, the contradictions within the central planning approach will also be shown. The latter included rivalries and struggles between the Ministry of Reconstruction and the Ministry of Industry during the early planning period; conflicts at the location itself, where trade unionists, local SED functionaries, labourers and inhabitants made claims on the developing town. Finally, the conflicting interests of plant and town are examined.
斯大林施塔特
1950年11月14日，也就是工厂开工后几个月，新市镇的位置就确定了[41]。在概念搜索阶段之后，库尔特·W·勒赫特（KurtW.Leucht）的一份草案于1951年成为所有其他规划的基础。新工厂和新城的规划是由分配给相关部委的中央局制定的。除了描述城镇概念及其实施，还将展示中央规划方法中的矛盾。后者包括重建部和工业部在早期规划期间的竞争和斗争；当地发生冲突，工会会员、当地SED官员、劳工和居民对发展中的城镇提出索赔。最后，分析了工厂和城镇之间的利益冲突。
In addition to the implemented draft of Kurt W. Leucht, the draft plan for the new town worked out by Franz Ehrlich is worthy of consideration. Franz Ehrlich was not the only planner who developed a design for the town before Kurt W. Leucht. Following the plans of Ehrlich there were two rounds of internal invitations to tender to which several architects had been invited. Ehrlich’s plan will be described in more detail because it was the first and because it tells of the ‘old’ communist–cosmopolitan spirit ‘to plan life and the world’ – a spirit which was to vanish in the implemented plan by Leucht, which instead gave space to the revival of national traditions and customs.
除了库尔特·W·勒希特（Kurt W.Leucht）已实施的草案外，弗兰兹·埃利希（Franz Ehrlich）制定的新城规划草案也值得考虑。弗兰兹·埃利希（FranzEhrlich）并不是唯一一位在库尔特·W·勒希特（KurtW.Leucht）之前为该镇设计的规划师。按照埃利希的计划，有两轮内部招标，邀请了几位建筑师参加。埃利希的计划将被更详细地描述，因为它是第一个，而且因为它讲述了“古老的”共产主义-世界主义精神“规划生活和世界”——这种精神将在勒希特实施的计划中消失，而这反而为民族传统和习俗的复兴提供了空间。
Behind the plans by Ehrlich and Leucht lay the competing planning concepts of the Ministries of Industry and Reconstruction [42]. The Ministry of Industry favoured the idea of an integrated plan of works and town; and in the opinion of Fritz Selbmann, the minister responsible for the new works, the Bauhaus follower Ehrlich could best represent this concept. By contrast Leucht was patronized by Lothar Bolz, the Minister of Reconstruction.
在埃利希和莱希特的计划背后，是工业部和重建部相互竞争的规划理念[42]。工业部支持工程和城镇综合规划的想法；在负责新作品的部长弗里茨·塞尔布曼看来，包豪斯的追随者埃利希最能代表这一概念。相比之下，莱希特得到了重建部长洛萨·博尔兹的庇护。
As the head of the urban development department in the Ministry of Reconstruction, Leucht presented the plan by which this ministry achieved its concept, an interpretation of The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development according to the guidelines set by the so-called ‘debate on formalism and heritage’. One could say that it was the tensions between ‘socialist reconstruction’ and ‘national reconstruction’ that were reflected in the planning competition between the two ministries. The horizon of an industrial concept is characterized by efficiency, modernization and a socialist perspective of development. In contrast, the ‘national tradition’ produces a self-image in which traces of memory are inscribed onto an otherwise neutral planning approach. As Leucht later recalled, ‘the third residential complex even has half-timbering’ [43].
作为重建部城市发展司司长，Leucht提出了该部实现其概念的计划，根据所谓的“形式主义和遗产辩论”制定的指导方针解释了城市发展的十六项原则。可以说，正是“社会主义重建”和“国家重建”之间的紧张关系反映在两部之间的规划竞争中。工业概念的视野以效率、现代化和社会主义发展观为特征。相比之下，“民族传统”产生了一种自我形象，在这种自我形象中，记忆的痕迹被刻在一种中立的规划方法上。正如莱希特后来回忆的那样，“第三个住宅区甚至有一半的木结构”[43]。
In the course of these early conflicts, the planning of works and town was separated. The town planning ended at the works’ gate. In Leucht’s plan, the works are symbolically integrated with a large gate, but at the same time it points out that the town stops there.
在这些早期冲突的过程中，工程和城镇的规划是分开的。城镇规划在工厂门口结束。在莱希特的计划中，这些作品象征性地与一扇大门结合在一起，但同时它指出小镇就停在那里。
The first draft
Of the first draft plan, a Ministry of Reconstruction memorandum baldly noted in March 1952: ‘In October 1950, the architect Ehrlich was commissioned to plan the residential town. The plan was worthless and did not agree with the 16 Principles of Urban Development’ [44]. Franz Ehrlich had been a Bauhaus student and was one of the exponents of this tradition in the GDR [45]. Although he had accomplished some important projects, he finally remained, as Bruno Flierl says, without influence and died almost forgotten (in the 1980s) [46].
1952年3月，重建部的一份备忘录在第一份计划草案中直言不讳地指出：“1950年10月，建筑师埃利希受命规划住宅区。该计划毫无价值，不符合城市发展的16项原则[44]。弗兰兹·埃利希（Franz Ehrlich）曾是包豪斯（Bauhaus）的学生，也是民主德国（GDR）这一传统的倡导者之一【45】。尽管他完成了一些重要的项目，但正如布鲁诺·弗利尔所说，他最终仍然没有影响力，几乎被遗忘（在20世纪80年代）[46]。
The first plan (Fig. 5, October 1950) relates to a site north of the works, which initially appeared as an attractive location but was then rejected. The sketched town is placed oblique to the works. It lies close to a lake, surrounded by green, and further north there is another lake. A small tributary runs to the lake between the works and the town. The regional traffic is led around the town to the south and west. The sketch is minimalist so that the first impression is of something abstractly constructed. There are clear arrangements, a defined extent of the town; with its elongated shape relating to the landscape. Arranged in a rectangular and parallel arrangement, multiple staggered rows form a serial pattern. This pattern produces open and partly closed spaces and reproduces itself in regular irregularities or in variants. Here and there quarter-centres can be imagined, but the sketch does not give any very clear visual impression of the town. In contrast, the town in the subsequent concept by Leucht is a Gesamtkunstwerk. Ehrlich developed an open concept of urban space, whereas in Leucht’s self-contained design only the town wall seems missing (Fig. 6). In further sketches Ehrlich worked out proposals for the then chosen location. Leucht’s first drafts incorporated the main features of these sketches [47].
第一份计划（图5，1950年10月）涉及工程北面的一个场地，该场地最初看起来很吸引人，但后来被拒绝。这座素描城镇的位置与建筑倾斜。它靠近一个湖，四周是绿色，再往北还有一个湖。一条小支流通往工厂和城镇之间的湖泊。该地区的交通由南部和西部的城镇组成。草图是极简主义的，因此第一印象是抽象构造的东西。有明确的安排，有明确的城镇范围；其细长的形状与景观有关。以矩形和平行排列排列，多个交错的行形成一个串行模式。这种模式产生开放和部分封闭的空间，并以规则的不规则或变体自我复制。这里和那里的四分之一中心是可以想象的，但草图并没有给这个城镇留下任何清晰的视觉印象。相反，Leucht随后提出的概念中的城镇是Gesamtkunstwerk。埃利希提出了一个开放的城市空间概念，而在莱希特的独立设计中，似乎只缺少了城墙（图6）。在进一步的草图中，埃利希为当时选定的地点提出了建议。Leucht的初稿包含了这些草图的主要特征[47]。
Ehrlich’s method of sketching a town without picturing its sensual and physical character still seems to contradict the spirit of The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development. ‘The central question of town planning and architectural design is the creation of an individual, unique face of the town’, the Principles state. In contrast, Ehrlich’s sketches appear as an abbreviation. The denial of a ‘realistic’ picture that allows immediate recognition of the town as a town, may already have isolated him merely for aesthetic reasons.
埃利希描绘一座城镇而不描绘其感官和物理特征的方法似乎仍然与城市发展的十六项原则的精神相矛盾城市规划和建筑设计的核心问题是创造一个独立的、独特的城市面貌。相比之下，埃利希的草图则是一个缩写。否认一幅“真实”的画面，使人们能够立即将该城镇视为一座城镇，这可能仅仅是出于美学原因，已经将他孤立了。
For the planning of the new town, Ehrlich also developed a model ‘structural plan’ [48]. This plan was based on a supply model which, by incorporating public and cultural services, covered a comparatively wide range. In addition to the demand for flats, all municipal, cultural, supply and other infrastructure, including their respective demands for space and staff, were determined, as well as the costs for construction, equipping and furnishing [49]. The reference frame for this planning was an overall economic calculation. The structural plan had been developed as a universal planning model for the GDR: Ehrlich drafted the new town as a prototype for the new state.
对于新城的规划，埃利希还制定了一个模型“结构规划”[48]。该计划基于一种供应模式，通过整合公共和文化服务，覆盖范围相对广泛。除了对公寓的需求，还确定了所有市政、文化、供应和其他基础设施，包括各自对空间和员工的需求，以及施工、装备和装修的成本[49]。该规划的参考框架是一个整体经济计算。该结构规划是作为民主德国的通用规划模式制定的：埃利希起草了新城作为新州的原型。
Franz Ehrlich thus started from a scientific conception of urban planning based on a variety of socio-economic parameters. His less illustrative but abstract plan drawings correspond with this conception. The idea of a ‘national form’ is, on the contrary, an idea of conciliation, born out of the difficulty of establishing a socialism that was compatible with popular sentiments. The formula ‘socialist in content, national in form’ means essentially that the innovation, the new (socialist) content, is adjusted to the old habits: in the concrete shape of the town, the population is able to recognize its ‘humanist’ German traditions. Pursuing this formula to its extreme, the assertion can be made that Ehrlich developed a socialist planning concept of the new town as the ‘content’, whereas Leucht contributed the sensual-conservative image as the ‘form’.
因此，弗兰兹·埃利希从基于各种社会经济参数的城市规划科学概念开始。他的示意性不强但抽象的平面图符合这一概念。“国家形式”的概念恰恰相反，它是一种和解的概念，产生于建立一个符合大众情绪的社会主义的困难。“内容社会主义，形式民族化”的公式本质上意味着创新，即新的（社会主义）内容，被调整为旧习惯：在城镇的具体形态中，民众能够认识到其“人文主义”的德国传统。将这一公式发挥到极致，可以断言，埃利希发展了一种以新城为“内容”的社会主义规划理念，而勒希特则将感官保守的形象作为“形式”加以贡献。
Kurt W. Leucht belonged to the group of architects who had gone on the study trip to Moscow that resulted in The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development [50]. Presumably, this trip also inspired him as an urban designer. Leucht’s statements about himself and his planning indicate that his ideas on town planning were less theoretical than associative and pictorial [51]. He finally synthesized the various debates on the Principles and the new town [52] into a unified whole concept, on which the authorities could agree. The draft worked out by Leucht promised a historically moderated modernism. During the planning process, the status of the model city was enhanced to become a prestige project of the new state. Thus the new town was not to be built as the prototype of the initial development of heavy industry burdened with sweat and tears. Rather it was to serve as the model for a better future. Nevertheless, the functionalist principle and system of Ehrlich’s plan can still be recognized in the city, in its clearly functional structure.
Kurt W.Leucht属于一组建筑师，他们前往莫斯科进行了一次考察，得出了《城市发展十六项原则》[50]。想必，这次旅行也启发了他成为一名城市设计师。Leucht对自己和他的规划的描述表明，他对城市规划的想法不如联想式和图画式的那么理论化[51]。他最终将关于原则和新城[52]的各种辩论综合成一个统一的整体概念，当局可以同意。勒希特起草的草案承诺了一种历史上温和的现代主义。在规划过程中，模范城市的地位得到了提升，成为新州的一个声望项目。因此，新市镇的建设并不是重工业最初发展的雏形，而是汗流浃背。相反，它是为了成为更美好未来的典范。尽管如此，埃利希规划的功能主义原则和体系仍然可以在城市中得到认可，在其明确的功能结构中。
Leucht’s design
‘With this design and the chance to build a new town, I wanted to set a counterpoint to the dominant urban design concepts in Germany and Europe: away from industrial settlements, away from dissolution of urban space’ [53]. The design developed by Kurt W. Leucht (Fig. 6) became the basis of all further town planning of Stalinstadt in August 1951. The terrain for the new town was happily chosen. It is situated on a terrace of fluvial valley sands. To the north, it borders on the plant, to the south-west, a chain of hills, to the east, the lowlands of the river Oder and a branch of the Oder-Spree Canal. Beyond the canal, lies the town of Fu¨ rstenberg an der Oder and, to the west, a village.
“有了这个设计，有机会建设一座新城，我想与德国和欧洲占主导地位的城市设计理念形成对比：远离工业区，远离城市空间的解体”[53]。1951年8月，库尔特·W·勒希特（Kurt W.Leucht，图6）开发的设计成为斯大林施塔特所有进一步城市规划的基础。新城镇的地形选择得很好。它位于河流河谷的一个阶地上。北面与工厂接壤，西南面是一连串的小山，东面是奥德河的低地和奥德斯普里运河的一条支流。运河那边是弗斯滕贝格镇，西边是一个村庄。
The draft shows the layout of a town designed for 30 000 inhabitants, relating programmatically both to the plant and the landscape. The entrance to the plant, monumentally staged, is the culminating point, upon which the town’s radial and concentric streets centre. The system of pedestrian walkways, opening up the inner spaces of the residential blocks, is designed with reference to the landscape. Its main axes are four large green spaces, laid out as pedestrian avenues, leading through the residential areas of the town, consisting of spacious open blocks with large inner courts. Structurally orientated towards the plant’s gate, the town defines itself in its relation to the works. The landscape of the wider setting provides a contrary accent. The hills (Diehloer Berge) to the south-west serve as a backdrop and recreational area. The town centre is formed by a large square lined by the major public buildings, among them, as the largest building, the House of Culture and the City Hall, which faces the plant’s gate at the other end of the Magistrale. Within the ideal city-like overall concept the town centre is semantically charged by the correspondence between the City Hall and the plant gate. According to Thomas Topfstedt the ground plan is formed following the radial development systems of Baroque town concepts, except that the Iron and Steel Combine with its colossal entrance building, rather than a castle, forms the point de vue [54]. From the city centre the view is directed towards the large gate (towards the sovereign/the plant). In the reverse direction from the plant gate the fan-shaped town arrangement and the landscape reveal as an overall view.
该草案显示了一个为3万居民设计的城镇的布局，从规划的角度将工厂和景观联系起来。
这座工厂的入口是一个具有纪念意义的地方，是该镇放射状和同心形街道的中心点。
人行道系统是根据景观设计的，开放了住宅区的内部空间。
它的主轴是四个大型绿地，作为步行街，穿过城镇的住宅区，由宽敞的开放式街区和大型内院组成。
从结构上看，该镇朝向工厂大门，与工厂的关系决定了其自身。
更广阔的背景提供了相反的口音。西南方向的小山（迪赫洛尔伯格）是一个背景和休闲区。
市中心由一个大型广场组成，广场两旁是主要的公共建筑，其中最大的建筑是文化之家和市政厅，它面对着位于治安法院另一端的工厂大门。
在理想的城市式整体概念中，市中心在语义上由市政厅和工厂大门之间的对应关系来控制。
根据托马斯·托普斯泰德（Thomas Topfstedt）的说法，平面图是按照巴洛克城镇概念的辐射式发展系统形成的，除了钢铁与巨大的入口建筑相结合，而不是城堡，形成了维角[54]。
从市中心可以看到大大门（朝向君主/工厂）。从植物大门往相反方向看，扇形城镇布局和景观呈现出整体视图。
The town design shuts itself off from the two adjacent settlements. The new town is connected to them via a major road in the north but there is no indication of the town of Fu¨ rstenberg which is 2–3 km east. The cross-axis of the town ends in front of the stadium at the eastern town edge. Leisure time facilities are placed in the green area on the eastern outskirts. The north-western edge of the design runs up to the village of Scho¨nfließ but embodies a rough town boundary. Overall therefore, the concept of the town rejects the place-bound traditions of its setting. It has been built into the landscape as a new, freestanding settlement, the outcome of a socio-political intention to depict a concept for the future.
该镇的设计与两个相邻的定居点隔绝。新镇通过北部的一条主要道路与他们相连，但没有迹象表明富尔斯滕贝格镇位于东部2-3公里处。城镇的十字轴在东部城镇边缘的体育场前结束。休闲设施位于东郊的绿化区。设计的西北边缘一直延伸到Scho¨nfließ村，但体现了一个粗糙的城镇边界。因此，总的来说，该镇的概念拒绝了其环境中受地域限制的传统。它作为一个新的、独立的定居点被建造在景观中，是描绘未来概念的社会政治意图的结果。
The buildings planned by Leucht are mainly four-storeyed, with some of three-storeys. The town consists of four ‘residential complexes’ (each for 6000 inhabitants). These are defined by the Principles as the smallest urban planning units, held together by a garden laid out for several blocks, schools, kindergartens, day-care centres for infants, and other establishments serving the daily needs of the residents. The town’s central locations are well accessible from the different residential quarters; and there are relatively protected semi-public and community-neighbourhood spaces. The distance between workplace and residence is reduced to a minimum.
Leucht规划的建筑主要为四层，其中一些为三层。该镇由四个“住宅区”组成（每个住宅区可容纳6000名居民）。《原则》将这些单元定义为最小的城市规划单元，由一个为几个街区、学校、幼儿园、婴儿日托中心和其他服务于居民日常需求的机构所规划的花园组成。从不同的住宅区可以很好地到达城镇的中心位置；还有相对受保护的半公共和社区邻里空间。工作场所和住所之间的距离减至最小。
Viewed overall, the uniqueness of Leucht’s design results from the attempt to construct an ideal congruence between traditional urban features and the new characteristics of a socialist industrial town. The resultant town, incorporating functional requirements of an industrial foundation on the one hand, and the claim to represent a cultural heritage on the other, suggests that socialism has to be visualized by familiar and traditional aesthetics. With the big plant gate industry is emphasized as a secular cathedral, the plant and the town, work and life reconciled in the ideal.
从整体上看，莱希特设计的独特性源于试图在传统城市特征和社会主义工业城镇的新特征之间构建理想的一致性。由此产生的城镇一方面包含了工业基础的功能要求，另一方面又声称代表了文化遗产，这表明社会主义必须通过熟悉的传统美学形象化。随着大门行业的大工厂被强调为一座世俗的大教堂，工厂与城镇、工作与生活在理想中调和。
The model city
The first residential buildings were constructed in 1951 to satisfy immediate needs before Leucht’s plan was drawn up. These dwellings were simple model houses as they were then developed by central architectural bureaux: serial, unpretentious, economic, modest. Over the following period, the status of the new town was gradually enhanced to represent finally a central political model planning. In 1952 it was proclaimed the ‘first socialist city’.
在勒赫特的计划制定之前，第一批住宅建筑于1951年建造，以满足眼前的需要。这些住宅是当时由中央建筑局开发的简单样板房：系列、朴实无华、经济、朴素。在接下来的一段时间里，新城的地位逐渐提高，最终成为中央政治规划的典范。1952年，它被宣布为“第一座社会主义城市”。
The structural features of an ideal city can readily be recognized in the master plan of 1952 (Fig. 7). The town is equipped almost like a self-sufficient entity, with baking, butchering, vegetable and fruit cultivation. There are various cultural establishments, leisure and recreation. The planned town thus appears to be a relatively closed ideal system of production and reproduction, while its extensive green areas make it also a leisure and recreation zone for the plant [55].
理想城市的结构特征很容易在1952年的总体规划中得到确认（图7）。该镇几乎像一个自给自足的实体，拥有烘焙、屠宰、蔬菜和水果种植。这里有各种文化设施、休闲娱乐场所。因此，规划中的城镇似乎是一个相对封闭的理想生产和再生产系统，而其广阔的绿地也使其成为工厂的休闲娱乐区[55]。
As part of the ideological upgrading of the town, the architectural design of the first and second residential complexes became more opulent. Considering the standards of that time, the flats were modern and spacious. As ‘workers’ palaces’ with large, imposing gateways, the buildings represent a modest version of Berlin’s Stalinallee, with its kind of Prusso-Russian, classicist style (Figs 8 and 9). The inner courts of the large residential blocks are grouped around park-like pedestrian avenues. Along these avenues are public facilities such as nurseries, day-care centres and playgrounds. At accentuated points, the blocks feature shopping parades. Schools and kindergartens are emphasized as public buildings. Small centres are created expressing collective life as socialist achievement. In their architecture the large blocks show an aesthetic ‘surplus’. Though functionally designed as neighbourhoods and with regard to communal amenities, they also represent the optimism and ornament of socialist superiority. The serial mass housing is incorporated in an urban design which features the overall context. The broad outline of urban ensembles and the spaciously planned connected green zones are a showpiece of the new property relations and planning conditions under socialism. Architecture, town and green space planning express a universal planning rationality which, at the same time, provides economic necessities with historicist garb.
作为城镇意识形态升级的一部分，第一和第二住宅区的建筑设计变得更加丰富。考虑到当时的标准，这些公寓既现代又宽敞。这些建筑是“工人宫殿”，有着巨大而雄伟的大门，代表着柏林斯大林纳利（Stalinalee）的一种朴素版本，带有普鲁索式的俄罗斯古典主义风格（图8和图9）。大型住宅区的内院围绕公园式的步行街。沿着这些街道是公共设施，如托儿所、日托中心和游乐场。在突出的地方，街区以购物游行为特色。学校和幼儿园被强调为公共建筑。创建了小型中心，将集体生活表达为社会主义成就。在他们的建筑中，大型街区显示出美学上的“剩余”。尽管它们在功能上被设计成邻里区和公共设施，但它们也代表着社会主义优越感的乐观和装饰。串联式体量住宅融入了城市设计，以整体环境为特征。城市群的大致轮廓和宽敞的规划连接的绿化区是社会主义条件下新的产权关系和规划条件的展示。建筑、城镇和绿地规划表达了一种普遍的规划合理性，同时也为经济需求提供了历史决定论的外衣。
Socialism was not, however, expected to herald any rapid collectivization of society within the residential complex. The core family remained the essential unit of planning. Certain reproduction facilities were centralized in Stalinstadt/Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt according to the level of rationalization achieved at the time. Baking, cooking, washing and upbringing were socialized, whereas the core family and, despite attempts, the allotment garden were not.
然而，社会主义并没有预示着住宅区内社会的任何快速集体化。核心家庭仍然是规划的基本单位。根据当时实现的合理化水平，某些繁殖设施集中在斯大林斯塔德/艾森豪登斯塔德。烘焙、烹饪、洗涤和抚养都是社会化的，而核心家庭和分配花园尽管有尝试，却没有。
The status enhancement of the new town into a model for the new socialist state, however, also brought different conflicts and difficulties. The demands of the government and SED leadership concerning the urban design of the new town conflicted with the construction programme for heavy industry, as well as with the general social requirements of reconstruction in the GDR.
然而，新城地位的提升成为社会主义新国家的典范，也带来了不同的冲突和困难。政府和SED领导层对新城城市设计的要求与重工业建设计划以及民主德国重建的总体社会要求相冲突。
The citizens
The various disruptions and problems of the post-war situation marked the beginnings of the new worker’s town. The town was formed by a disparate population of refugees, farm workers, women and youths, seeking employment at the construction sites and in the new plant. They were people who had not necessarily come to stay but finally settled down. Little by little the founding population moved from camps to the town’s newly constructed flats. Due to the sluggish start to the construction of the city, the plant had to take over basic supplies and services for the employees in order to build up a work force. It organized recreational and cultural activities and erected an infrastructure for this purpose on its own site. It was thus within the works’ environment that the foundations of the town’s society were actually laid.
战后局势的各种干扰和问题标志着新工人镇的开始。该镇由难民、农场工人、妇女和年轻人组成，他们在建筑工地和新工厂寻找工作。他们不一定是来住的，但最终还是安定下来了。创始人口一点一点地从营地转移到镇上新建的公寓。由于城市建设起步缓慢，工厂不得不接管员工的基本用品和服务，以建立一支劳动力队伍。它组织了娱乐和文化活动，并在自己的场地上为此建立了一个基础设施。因此，正是在工程环境中，才真正奠定了该镇社会的基础。
Whereas the town was planned by central bureaux in Berlin, objections were formulated on the spot [56]. The first of these appeared in the house organ of the works, Unser Friedenswerk (our peace work). They were directed against the first, rather utilitarian, residential buildings. To their future inhabitants they seemed like boxes. When the SED secretary-general, Walter Ulbricht, visited the town, he took over the leadership of the protest, calling for higher rooms (three metres between the floors), at least four storeys, and diversified, lively façades. In February 1952 the government decided: ‘All plans are to be discussed in detail and publicly with the workers of the Iron and Steel Combine East. The Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Reconstruction, Dr. Bolz, bears the responsibility for the measures to be taken’ [57]. In fact, at this time a discussion got underway. Meetings for the metal and construction workers and the inhabitants were organized, the planners and the Minister of Reconstruction came from Berlin to take part. Subsequently, the ground plans and the sizes of the flats were altered according to the demands of the population, headed by Walter Ulbricht. In July 1952, the Second Party Conference of the Socialist Unity Party decided to ‘build up socialism’ and announced that the town of the Iron and Steel Combine East was to be the first construction of a socialist city. In the late summer of 1952, Leucht was installed as Manager in General.
尽管该镇是由柏林的中央局规划的，但反对意见是当场提出的[56]。其中第一个出现在众议院的工作机构，Unser Friedenswerk（我们的和平工作）。他们针对的是第一批相当实用的住宅建筑。对他们未来的居民来说，它们就像盒子。当SED秘书长沃尔特·乌尔布里希特（Walter Ulbricht）访问该镇时，他接管了抗议活动的领导权，要求提供更高的房间（楼层之间三米），至少四层楼，以及多样化、生动的立面。1952年2月，政府决定：“所有计划都将与东钢铁联合公司的工人进行详细的公开讨论。副总理兼重建部长Bolz博士对将要采取的措施负责。事实上，此时正在进行讨论。为金属和建筑工人以及居民组织了会议，规划者和重建部长从柏林赶来参加。随后，根据沃尔特·乌尔布里希特领导的人口需求，改变了平面图和公寓的大小。1952年7月，社会主义统一党第二次党代会决定“建设社会主义”，并宣布钢铁联合东城将是第一个建设社会主义城市的城市。1952年夏末，Leucht被任命为总经理。
None the less the work did not make progress. At a turbulent meeting in October 1952, the representatives of the Ministry of Reconstruction were taken to task. Out of 905 flats that were to be constructed in 1952, at the most 360 would be ready on time. There were hardly any shops and no social infrastructure, along with other similar problems. According to a report in the SED district newspaper, Neuer Tag (New Day), the central committee of the metal workers union demanded that all construction sections planned for 1952 should be completed in 1952. At least once a month a compulsory public meeting should be held, the union demanded, where accounts were to be given and where suggestions and advice from the population would be brought up for discussion; in order to improve the co-ordination of planning and construction, a project team should be formed to work on the spot, in the plant.
尽管如此，这项工作还是没有取得进展。1952年10月，在一次动荡的会议上，重建部的代表被责成。在1952年建造的905套公寓中，最多360套将按时完工。那里几乎没有商店，没有社会基础设施，还有其他类似的问题。根据SED地区报纸Neuer Tag（New Day）的报道，金属工人工会中央委员会要求计划于1952年完工的所有施工路段应于1952年完工。工会要求，至少每月举行一次强制性的公开会议，在会上说明情况，并提出民众的建议和建议供讨论；为了改善规划和施工的协调，应组建一个项目团队，在工厂现场工作。
The EKO-employees did not leave it at complaints. They supported their pressure for a swift erection of the town by giving their labour to this end. In early November, the Neuer Tag reported that they were voluntarily going to work 20 000 hours on the construction site. On the other hand, the paper also reproached the Ministry of Reconstruction for omissions: again and again, workers and machines were lacking and production conferences were delayed by the representatives of the state.
EKO员工没有留下投诉。他们为此付出了劳动，以支持他们要求迅速建立该镇的压力。11月初，Neuer Tag报告称，他们自愿在施工现场工作20000小时。另一方面，该报还指责重建部的疏漏：工人和机器一次又一次地短缺，生产会议被国家代表推迟。
In February 1953 the town was officially founded and a town council appointed. The era of the Manager in General was over. In the course of that year, Stalinstadt put through its demand to subordinate the construction management to the town, and from then on all planning decisions had to be co-ordinated and agreed upon by the government and the town. Yet it is important not to exaggerate the extent of the decentralization of decision-making. The new municipality itself was constructed as a part of the centralist system so that the municipal bodies also simplified and accelerated the planning process for the central authorities. Participation of the inhabitants was now canalized into institutional forms (as house communities or permanent commissions).
1953年2月，该镇正式成立，并任命了市议会。总经理的时代已经结束了。在那一年中，斯大林斯塔特提出了将施工管理从属于该镇的要求，从那时起，所有规划决策都必须得到政府和该镇的协调和同意。然而，重要的是不要夸大决策权力下放的程度。新的直辖市本身是作为中央集权体制的一部分建设的，因此市政机构也简化和加快了中央当局的规划过程。居民的参与现在被转化为机构形式（如家庭社区或永久委员会）。
In the debates accompanying the planning process, claims were advanced concerning the size of flats, their ground plans, the surroundings, urban facilities and amenities. The people of Stalinstadt certainly did influence and modify the planning process, but their success was only possible because SED, trade union, district functionaries and, later on, also municipal functionaries, supported their claims and presented them to the deciding authorities. In this way the government/SED leadership were able to demonstrate and promote a sense of unity with the population in socialism. The results may be claimed as successful. To the present day Stalinstadt/Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt has been popular with its inhabitants. Against all expectations, Bruno Flierl reports, Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt developed happily and the inhabitants identified themselves with their city [58].
在规划过程中的辩论中，有人提出了有关公寓面积、平面图、周边环境、城市设施和便利设施的主张。斯大林斯塔特的人民确实影响并修改了规划过程，但他们的成功只是因为SED、工会、地区官员，以及后来的市政官员支持他们的主张，并将其提交给决策当局。通过这种方式，政府/SED领导层能够展示并促进社会主义中与民众的团结意识。结果可以说是成功的。时至今日，斯大林斯塔德/艾森豪斯大林斯塔德一直深受其居民的欢迎。布鲁诺·弗利尔（Bruno Flierl）报道称，出乎意料的是，艾森豪特斯坦德发展得很快乐，居民们认同自己的城市[58]。
Khrushchev’s changes
赫鲁晓夫的变化
Stalinstadt represented the industrial as well as the aesthetic urban design project of the early GDR for a short time only. After Stalin’s death and the rebellion of 17 June 1953 the programme to build up heavy industry was slowed down considerably. The prospective iron and steel combine, EKO, remained an iron works for the time being [59]. In 1954, the new Soviet leader, Nikita Khrushchev, proclaimed the industrialization of construction. Khrushchev’s modernization was to prove the big break with the concept of planning oriented towards traditions. The turn was made in the context of the ‘new course’ after Stalin’s death, envisaging an economic and socio-political reorientation in favour of mass needs. For urban planning it meant a shift of emphasis, giving the mass production of housing priority over prestige projects.
斯大林达特仅在很短的时间内代表了早期民主德国的工业和美学城市设计项目。在斯大林去世和1953年6月17日的叛乱之后，建立重工业的计划大大放缓。未来的钢铁联合企业EKO目前仍是一家钢铁厂。1954年，苏联新领导人尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫宣布建筑产业化。赫鲁晓夫的现代化是为了证明与面向传统的规划理念的重大突破。这一转变是在斯大林去世后的“新路线”背景下做出的，它设想了一个有利于大众需求的经济和社会政治重新定位。对于城市规划来说，这意味着重点的转移，让大规模生产住房优先于名望项目。
The GDR first adhered to the idea of ‘national architecture’ and tried to master the modernization with the old aesthetic gestures and rhetoric. In Stalinstadt, the third residential\ complex was built with reference to a Heimatstil, which allowed certain rationalizations of construction and adjusted itself ‘organically’ to the existing urban concept. For the fourth (and last) residential complex of the original plan, a partially rationalized construction method was chosen. Here, for the first time, the buildings were arranged in open, detached rows, which – because of the less clearly defined urban spaces – produce, however, an impression of narrowness. At the Magistrale, three point-like (nine-storeyed) buildings were erected around 1960, as well as a department store and a hotel located at the junction with the Central Square. With their ‘hovering’ roofs of white and blue, they present a modern image. In between there are pavilions with shops, among them a vitreous car shop with a sweeping roof of pre-stressed concrete. Viewed overall, the Magistrale with its modern buildings, similar to those built in the West at the same time, sets a counterpoint, vivid in contrast to the residential quarters, which has enriched the features of the town.
民主德国首先坚持“国家建筑”的理念，并试图用古老的审美姿态和修辞来掌握现代化。在斯大林施塔特，第三个住宅综合楼是参照海马特提尔（Heimattil）建造的，它允许建筑的某些合理化，并“有机地”调整自身以适应现有的城市概念。对于原计划的第四个（也是最后一个）住宅综合体，选择了部分合理化的施工方法。在这里，这些建筑第一次被安排成开放的、独立的一排，然而，由于城市空间定义不那么清晰，这给人留下了狭窄的印象。大约在1960年左右，在Magistrale修建了三座尖形（九层）建筑，以及一家百货公司和一家位于中央广场交界处的酒店。它们白色和蓝色的“悬停”屋顶呈现出现代的形象。中间有带商店的亭子，其中有一个玻璃汽车店，屋顶是预应力混凝土。从整体上看，治安法院的现代建筑与同时在西方修建的建筑相似，与住宅区形成鲜明对比，丰富了该镇的特色。
More generally, the intention of the Reconstruction Act to plan urban growth could not be achieved in the way Kurt W. Leucht’s design for an ideal city had figuratively indicated. The plant was expanded in the 1960s and the town had to keep up with the growing demand for workers by providing additional housing. Already by 1953, the master plan (Fig. 10) had been revised: the self-contained concept was opened and the east–west axis of the town was developed as a connection with Fu¨ rstenberg. Immediately south-east of the town, the first extension area (the fifth residential complex) was built in the early 1960s. It was planned with buildings arranged in rows and lines according to a concept that was inspired – as Herbert H¨ artel, then architect of the city, has reported [60] – by the West German model of a ‘car-suitable town’. Subsequent development, since the incorporation of Fu¨ rstenberg in 1961 and the town’s renaming as Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt, marked a more radical break with the original town concept and the orientation towards the style of the then common mass housing. By the end of the 1980s, a sixth and seventh residential complex had been completed, closing the gap to Fu¨ rstenberg. These later town quarters had a noticeably poorer quality infrastructure than the earlier ones.
更普遍地说，《重建法案》旨在规划城市增长的意图无法像库尔特·W·勒希特的理想城市设计所象征的那样实现。该工厂于20世纪60年代扩建，该镇必须通过提供额外住房来满足日益增长的工人需求。到1953年，总体规划（图10）已经进行了修订：独立的概念被打开，城镇的东西轴线被开发为与弗斯滕贝格的连接线。第一个扩建区（第五个住宅综合体）建于20世纪60年代初，紧邻该镇东南部。它是按照一个概念规划的，按照一排排的建筑排列，这个概念是受到西德“适合汽车的城镇”模式的启发的——当时的城市建筑师赫伯特·赫特尔（Herbert H¨artel）曾报道过[60]。自1961年福斯滕贝格（Fu¨rstenberg）成立和该镇更名为艾森豪登斯塔特（Eisenhu¨ttenstadt）以来，该镇的后续发展标志着与最初的城镇概念和当时普通大众住房的风格有了更彻底的突破。到20世纪80年代末，第六和第七栋住宅楼已经完工，缩小了与弗斯滕贝格的差距。这些后来的城镇居民区的基础设施质量明显低于早期的居民区。
None of the central spaces and buildings that were part of Leucht’s plan were built. Early on, a theatre/cinema was built in the style of a Greek temple at the Magistrale. The Friedrich- Wolf-Theater (Fig. 11) and a large restaurant with a pub, the Aktivist, were the first meeting and public amusement locales. A somewhat hidden centre developed later on to the rear of the theatre, a market place framed by shops opposite which craftsmen’s co-operative was situated.
莱希特计划中的所有中心空间和建筑均未建成。早些时候，在地方法院以希腊寺庙的风格修建了一座剧院/电影院。第一次见面的是沃尔夫酒吧和娱乐场所。后来在剧院后面发展了一个隐秘的中心，这是一个由商店构成的市场，对面是工匠合作社。
The planned axis of works’ gate ‘cathedral’ and the city hall tower never came into being. From the Magistrale, one gets a striking view of the blast furnaces (Fig. 12). Between the works and the town, there is a broad four-lane thoroughfare. Yet the Central Square in Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt remains empty and is today used as a car park.
规划中的工程轴线“大教堂大门”和市政厅大楼从未建成。从地方法院可以看到高炉的醒目视图（图12）。在工厂和城镇之间，有一条宽阔的四车道大道。然而，艾森豪登的中央广场仍然空无一人，今天被用作停车场。
Works and town
One idiosyncrasy of Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt’s development results from its early history when the works already existed, but the construction of the town was proceeding only slowly. Different facilities that were more communal in character were set up on the works’ premises: shops, pubs, libraries, schools and, above all, a large trade union House of Culture and also BGS Stahl [61], the sports club. Later on, when the town existed, the works nevertheless continued to elaborate social and cultural facilities on its own grounds. As Stalinstadt lost its significance as a model town so its financial resources also became more moderate. Yet the works in the GDR always had large cultural and social funds. The EKO used them to construct a city of its own within the works, instead of placing these amenities where they would have been needed, in the town [62].
艾森豪特坦斯塔特发展的一个特点来自其早期历史，当时作品已经存在，但该镇的建设进展缓慢。在作品的场地上设置了不同的公共设施：商店、酒吧、图书馆、学校，尤其是一个大型的工会文化之家，以及BGS Stahl（61），体育俱乐部。后来，当该镇存在时，工程仍在继续在其自己的场地上精心设计社会和文化设施。随着斯大林达特失去了作为模范城镇的重要性，其财政资源也变得更加温和。然而，民主德国的作品总是有大量的文化和社会资金。EKO利用这些设施在工程范围内建造了一座自己的城市，而不是将这些设施放置在城镇需要的地方【62】。
The community was thus the weaker partner compared to the EKO, an enterprise led by the government. The difference in their respective power was obvious and it is in this rivalry that H¨artel sees the reason why the Central Square remained an empty space. In the 1960s he pursued a concept that should have made the city centre the common central point of an administrative and cultural centre of both plant and town [63]. It may be assumed that such a centre would have symbolized a local autonomy which did not exist in reality. Yet, according to H¨ artel’s report, it should have been possible [64]. However, the works’ management and the trade union leadership were interested only in using the funds for their own purposes on their own premises. It was a kind of ‘enterprise egoism’, always demonstrating that they were able to do everything conceivable in favour of the labourers.
因此，与政府领导的企业EKO相比，社区是较弱的合作伙伴。他们各自力量的差异是显而易见的，正是在这场竞争中，赫特尔看到了为什么中央广场仍然是一片空白。20世纪60年代，他所追求的理念本应使市中心成为工厂和城镇行政和文化中心的共同中心点【63】。可以假定，这样一个中心将象征着一种实际上并不存在的地方自治。然而，根据哈特尔的报告，这本应该是可能的。然而，工厂的管理层和工会领导层只对在自己的场所将资金用于自己的目的感兴趣。他们展示了一种“自私自利”的企业精神，这是一种“自私自利”。
Close examination of the master plan of 1953 reveals that, instead of the City Hall, the large ‘House of Culture’ had been placed in the centre of the main axis. From then on culture was to symbolize the ideal connection between works and town. Even before the town was barely founded, the City Hall vanished from the central axis. Instead of a City Hall there was a ‘House of the party and municipal administration’ (Fig. 13). By fusing party and administration, the public political space and municipal representation were abandoned. The Polis disappeared from the plans. Party, administration and culture had taken its place.
仔细检查1953年的总体规划可以发现，大的“文化之家”不是市政厅，而是位于主轴的中心。从那时起，文化象征着作品与城镇之间的理想联系。甚至在该镇刚刚建立之前，市政厅就从中轴线上消失了。这里没有市政厅，而是“党政之家”（图13）。通过政党和政府的融合，公共政治空间和市政代表权被抛弃。城邦从计划中消失了。党、政府和文化取而代之。
‘The aim of urban development’, as stated in The Sixteen Principles of Urban Development, ‘is the harmonic satisfaction of the human demand for work, dwelling, culture, and recreation’. Harmony was to be the task and general sense of urban development. However, according to the position of the GDR in the early years, such urban harmony could actually be pursued only after social order itself had become harmonized as socialist. Only after overcoming class struggles and after the nationalization of property could a new socialist ‘community of man’ be developed, giving way to a development of towns where the formerly opposing spheres of life, work, dwelling, culture and recreation, could then join in harmony. Stalinstadt was meant as a paradigm of both a new social order and a new social town.
正如《城市发展十六项原则》所述，“城市发展的目标是和谐地满足人类对工作、居住、文化和娱乐的需求”。和谐是城市发展的任务和普遍意义。然而，根据民主德国早期的立场，这种城市和谐实际上只有在社会秩序本身与社会主义和谐之后才能实现。只有在克服阶级斗争和财产国有化之后，才能发展一个新的社会主义“人的共同体”，让位于城镇的发展，在那里，以前对立的生活、工作、居住、文化和娱乐领域才能和谐地结合在一起。斯大林斯塔特是一个新的社会秩序和新的社会城镇的典范。
Culture and work were therefore to be symbolically connected by the town’s central axis just as the burdens of daily work were to be set against the opportunities for cultural expression. Even more, though, the sphere of work was itself to be embedded in the cultural project and to become a cultural activity. In practice, this meant that in the EKO (as well as other enterprises in the GDR) the efficiency competitions between the work brigades, were echoed in the writing, painting and dance competitions and, conversely, the artistic creations themselves celebrated labour. The signs of the endeavour for harmony come forth in Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt, both in the big picture and in detail. It can thus be seen in the symmetrical layout of the whole and in the ornamentation of the façades, or in the well-proportioned endowment of educational, shopping and recreational facilities and the murals and sculptures which embellish the public space. Here can be found central amenities such as the Friedrich-Wolf-Theater, the open-air stage, the Aktivist, and the different sports grounds. As all this together was a testimony to unity and harmony, the social organizations functioned on their behalf, at the head the Socialist Unity Party and the National Front, uniting all workers and the friendly classes in one effort to build up socialism.
因此，文化和工作通过城镇的中轴线象征性地联系在一起，就像日常工作的负担与文化表达的机会对立一样。然而，更重要的是，工作领域本身将嵌入文化项目，并成为一种文化活动。实际上，这意味着在EKO（以及民主德国的其他企业）中，工作队之间的效率竞争在写作、绘画和舞蹈比赛中得到了回应，相反，艺术创作本身也在庆祝劳动。艾森豪斯·坦斯塔德（Eisenhu¨ttenstadt）从整体和细节上都展现了和谐努力的迹象。因此，它可以从整体的对称布局和立面的装饰中看到，也可以从均衡的教育、购物和娱乐设施以及装饰公共空间的壁画和雕塑中看到。在这里可以找到中心设施，如弗里德里希·沃尔夫剧院、露天舞台、Aktivist和不同的运动场。由于所有这些共同证明了团结与和谐，社会组织以其名义发挥作用，领导社会主义统一党和民族阵线，团结所有工人和友好阶级，共同建设社会主义。
This overriding concept of harmony thus depicted socialism as a Gesamtkunstwerk, conjuring away any persisting social and political contradictions. Above all it was an approach that was suspicious of experiment. Its metaphors paid tribute to a (new) classicism, stability and conservation of tradition. The status of historical monument awarded to Eisenhu¨ ttenstadt in the 1980s seems, therefore, to have been inscribed in it from the very beginning.
因此，这种压倒一切的和谐概念将社会主义描绘成一种格萨姆特昆斯特维克（Gesamtkunstwerk），消除了任何持续存在的社会和政治矛盾。最重要的是，这是一种怀疑实验的方法。它的隐喻赞扬了（新的）古典主义、稳定性和对传统的保护。因此，20世纪80年代授予艾森豪斯泰德的历史纪念碑的地位似乎从一开始就刻在了它上面。
